Date:         Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:17:42 -0500
Reply-To:     Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
From:         David Hoerl <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Gaining an advantage and thus offside - Second Example
In-Reply-To:  <014e01c17e81$bf17bf10$7ea859cf@D5LYTZ01>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "David Hoerl" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 10:17 AM
>Subject: Re: Gaining an advantage and thus offside - Second Example
>
>
>>  Another example. Should provide more meat for the discussion.
>>
>
>(snip)
>see if the GK can control the ball.  Whether or not A1 is first to the ball
>or A2 is...makes no difference to the Offside call. The triad was completed,
>the moment A2 made a move towards the ball - who actually gets there is
>irrelivant, and now you're only waiting to see if the defender's GK can
>control the ball because it would be better than a IFK.
>
>It seems to me that too many folks are trying to make this thing
>complicated - it is not. Complete the triad and the violation exists. Now it
>only remains to be seen if the defense can control the ball in a way which
>is more favorable to them than the IFK would be. Who runs faster than whom,
>who gets there first, second, third , or whenever is not even a factor.  In
>order for you to NOT at least mentally flag the infraction..A2 would have
>had to turn upfield or towards you - the AR - as an indication that he knew
>he was in an offside position, but wanted you(the AR ) to realize he was
>taking himself out of the play.  Otherwise.....keep it simple.
>
>ED


Ed,

I just went back to the "Advice to Referees" from USSF:

Among the specifically stated responsibilities of the assistant
referee is to indicate "when a player may be penalized for being in
an offside position." Because "it is not an offence in itself to be
in an offside position," the assistant referee must interpret this
responsibility to require that he determine not only if an attacker
is in an offside position but also if that same player is involved in
active play by interfering with play, interfering with an opponent,
or gaining an advantage by being in the offside position (see Law
11). The assistant referee should use his unique perspective on the
touchline as a trained, neutral official and provide the appropriate
signal so that the referee can make a final determination as to
whether the attacker will be penalized for an offside infringement.

I look at my situation, and apply it to what I saw, using above criteria:

1) interfering with play.
My response - until a defender was interfered with, or the ball
touched, I just don't see how a person running alone (ie, not in a
crowd where they would be interfering with others nearby) can be
construed as interfering with play.

2) interfering with an opponent
My response - no one nearbyt, no obstruction, or other effect on any opponent

3) or gaining an advantage by being in the offside position
My response - again, if the offside player was removed on the field,
or left on, the play would have gone on exactly as it did - no
advantage gained.


If I follow your logic, then a player who was running flat out on the
FAR side of the field, 40 yards from the ball, and continuing to run
down the field, should cause a offside call. This is something I
almost never see in games I observe.

David


PS: I don't see it as simple. I see it as something that we must
apply our experience and knowledge to, and I have to really observe
the behavior around the play and the offside person or persons to
apply the rule.